Top Banner
URM and IMRAD format
30

URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Dec 27, 2015

Download

Documents

Liliana Sharp
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

URM and IMRAD format

Page 2: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Vancouver group

• 1978, Vancouver, Canada

• Uniform submission

• Make life easier for authors

• No rejection on grounds of style

Page 3: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.
Page 4: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts

Manuscript PreparationPreparing a Manuscipt for Submission to Biomedical

JournalsSending the Manuscript to the Journal

ReferencesPrint References Cited in this Document

Other Sources of Information Related to Biomedical Journals

Page 5: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.
Page 6: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.
Page 7: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Parts of an essay

Beginning

Main Body

End

Page 8: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Sir Bradford Hill’s Questions

• Why did you start?

• What did you do?

• What did you find?

and

• What does it all mean?

Page 9: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Parts of a paper: IMRAD

I Introduction

M Methods

R Results

a and

D Discussion

Page 10: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Sir Bradford Hill’s Questions

I Introduction Why did you start?

M Methods What did you do?

R Results What did you find?

A and

D Discussion What does it all mean?

Page 11: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Introduction

Why did you start?

Readers’ expectations

• Sufficient background information

• Understand and evaluate the results

• Without referring to previous publications

Concise, adequate

Not a review

Page 12: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Introduction

• Review pertinent literature

• Define lacunae in current knowledge

• Provide rationale for your study– What gap in knowledge did you try to fill?

– What controversy did you try to resolve?

• State the aim of the study

Page 13: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Introduction

• Brief, clear, to the point

• Written in present tense

• May state the study group, study design and methods used

Page 14: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Introduction

• Key references: to support background information

• Refer to – your previous preliminary work

– your own closely related papers

• Define any specialized terms, definitions or abbreviations you intend to use

Page 15: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Example

We wish to suggest a structure for the salt of deoxyribose nucleic acid (D.N.A.). This structure has novel features which are of considerable biological importance.

Watson JD, Crick FHC. A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature 1953; 171: 737-8.

Page 16: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Methods

What did you do?

Page 17: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Methods

• What all was done?

• How was it done?

• When was it done?

• Who did it ?

• How were the results analyzed?

• Did you have ethical clearance to do so?

Page 18: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Methods

– Present methods in chronological order– Subheadings should match those in results

‘internal consistency’

– In past tense– Be precise

Page 19: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Methods: checklist

• Does it describe – What questions was being asked?– What was being tested?– How reliable was the measurement?

• Were the parameters recorded and analyzed correctly?

• Would a reader be able to repeat the same experiment?

Page 20: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results

Answers

What did you find?

Page 21: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results: Before writing

• Collate data

• Prepare master tables– Re-check accuracy

• Analyse– List all the findings

– Identify the important ones

Page 22: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results: The components

• Text Story

• Tables Meat

• Figures Drama

Page 23: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results

• Results of all experiments in natural orderin subsections similar to methods

• Do not duplicate information

text, tables, figures

• Statistical analysis

Page 24: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results

• Should not include– Any methods

– Data for which methods are not included

– Interpretation of data

– References

Page 25: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results: Tables

Table I. Parts of a table

Footnote:

Stub Columnheading

Columnheading

Columnheading

Row identifier

Row identifier

BODY

Page 26: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results: Table or figure

• Prefer tables

• Use figures only for illustrative

• Bar, histogram, pie: ? table

Difference in written and oral communication

Page 27: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Results: Text or Tables

• Number of items

• Few variables: Text

• Many variables: Table

Page 28: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Figure: in place of text

Intraperitoneal inoculation of

1 X 106 DLA cells (day 0)

0 1 2 3 4 30

Group 1 Vehicle

Group 2 Total alkaloid fraction (5 mg/Kg/d)

Group 3 Total alkaloid fraction (10 mg/Kg/d)

Group 4 Total alkaloid fraction (20 mg/Kg/d)

Group 5 Methotrexate (3.4 mg/Kg/d) (Positive control)

Days

Treatment (d 1,2,3)Observation

Study design

Page 29: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Figure: not in place of table

Page 30: URM and IMRAD format. Vancouver group 1978, Vancouver, Canada Uniform submission Make life easier for authors No rejection on grounds of style.

Summary

• URM

• IMRAD–Introduction

–Methods

–Results

and

–Discussion